I am praying for your soul and that you may rest in peace. Our family will be having a mass said for you. We will continue to hold your family up in prayer. We will never forget what was done to you and will continue to fight for the truth to be exposed.

Maybe we need a law then that states a judge must HEAR and RULE on a guardianship challenge within a set time limit, and no feeding tubes may be removed at the request of a guardian until the guardianship challenge has exhausted all appealable state proceedings.

In reference to the testimony regarding the Quinlan case here is some interesting info from St. Petersburg Times November 8, 2003

(excerpt) Mrs. Schiavo's parents fought back. Her mother, Mary Schindler, said she discussed with her daughter the famous right-to-die case of Karen Ann Quinlan, back when the legal fight to take Quinlan off a ventilator was front-page news.

"If they take her off, she might die. Just leave her alone and she will die whenever," she said her daughter told her.

Felos introduced newspaper stories showing that the Quinlan case was front-page news when Terri Schiavo was 11 or 12 years old.

Mrs. Schiavo's former friend, Diane Meyer, recalled watching a movie about Quinlan in the summer of 1982 after they graduated high school.

"I remember one of the things she said is, 'How did they know she would want this? How did they know she wouldn't want to go on?' " Meyer testified.

According to the petition that Attorney Gibbs has filed, Judge Greer discounted Diane Meyer's testimony about the 1982 conversation because she referred to Karen Quinlan in the present tense and he felt, therefore, that the conversation must have occured in the 1970s. However, Karen Quinlan actually died in 1985 and it was entirely appropriate for Diane Meyer to state her testimony in the present tense because when their conversation occurred in 1982 Karen Quinlan was still alive. I think this is a huge find because it shoots a very large hole in the "clear and convincing evidence" standard that all the courts have upheld.

--- I've also been pondering this question of "who lobbied to change the law in FL". In digging around, here are some interesting documents that I have found in relation to this question.

"The 1998 Florida Legislature created (CS/CS/HB 3387),The Panel For The Study of End-Of-Life care. This 22 member panel was directed to study issues related to the care provided to persons as they near the end of their lives." This panel was the starting point for the legislation that was eventually passed and changed the law in 1999 in Florida.

This interim report details the individuals who were on the panel, which included none other than Mary Labyak, Executive Director And CEO, Hospice of The Florida Suncoast.

In reading this report and looking through the 22 member panel, I do not see anyone representing the interests of the disabled and incapacitated.

The panel was administered by the Pepper Institute on Aging and Public Policy from Florida State University. The Pepper Institute is listed on the "Center For Practical Bioethics" Website as being on their "community state partnerships to improve end-of-life care." (http://www.midbio.org/npo-map.htm) The Center For Practical Bioethics shows the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation as a financial contributor. (http://www.midbio.org/mbc-gift.htm)

I've also been pondering this question of "who lobbied to change the law in FL". In digging around, here are some interesting documents that I have found in relation to this question.

"The 1998 Florida Legislature created (CS/CS/HB 3387),The Panel For The Study of End-Of-Life care. This 22 member panel was directed to study issues related to the care provided to persons as they near the end of their lives." This panel was the starting point for the legislation that was eventually passed and changed the law in 1999 in Florida.

This interim report details the individuals who were on the panel, which included none other than Mary Labyak, Executive Director And CEO, Hospice of The Florida Suncoast.

In reading this report and looking through the 22 member panel, I do not see anyone representing the interests of the disabled and incapacitated.

The panel was administered by the Pepper Institute on Aging and Public Policy from Florida State University. The Pepper Institute is listed on the "Center For Practical Bioethics" Website as being on their "community state partnerships to improve end-of-life care." (http://www.midbio.org/npo-map.htm) The Center For Practical Bioethics shows the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation as a financial contributor. (http://www.midbio.org/mbc-gift.htm)

I don't post here much but was reading this thread. I also recall the woman you are speaking of...that during the debate for Terri's Law she mentioned that she had helped write the 1999 law and said that they never meant it for a person who was brain damaged, rather someone who was comatose. Could you be thinking of House Representative Heather Fiorentino?

I rarely post here but wanted to say what a great article on the legal flip flop. Here is a link to what ran in the St. Petersburg Times after the malpractice award. Makes very interesting reading especially where the attorney for the SCHIAVO's makes the point that, "you can tell she has some sense of her predicament." 1992 Malpractice Settlement

May God Bless you richly today and always! Our family will be saying a rosary for you on the celebration of your 40th birthday and will be inviting other friends to do the same. You are in our thoughts and prayers today and always.

(excerpt) Pinellas Circuit Judge George Greer will not allow a group of doctors, lawyers and other professionals to intervene in the case of a St. Petersburg woman with brain damage whose family is divided on whether to remove her feeding tube. Professionals for Excellence in Health Care wanted the judge to allow them to argue that Terri Schiavo, 36, should be kept alive despite her husband's request to let her die.

In his order denying the motion, Greer writes that the group's arguments are philosophical and perhaps should be directed to state lawmakers.

According to Schiavo, his wife had told him that she never wanted to be put on "anything artificial" to be kept alive.

It was clear that she didn't want to be kept alive with the help of a machine, although she never specifically said "gastrointestinal tube," said George Felos, who is representing Michael Schiavo.

"Our legal argument to the court of appeal is 'That's now how people relay their wishes in the real world,' " Felos said. "How specific does someone have to be when expressing how to carry out their wishes?"

So in August 2000 Terri's words were "nothing artificial".

Now in 2003 her words were "no tubes for me?" Sounds like more manipulation by Felos....

The point I was trying to make from the article was that if anyone just listened to the mainstream media, one would hear that Terri cannot swallow anything. Here we have in the actual testimony that she can swallow but is just not able to eat enough food to sustain her. The woman was denied receiving the holy eucharist because she "could not swallow" anything. What a lie...

(excerpt) Mrs. Schiavo's husband, Michael, opposed the swallowing test because he said it would have taken away her dignity and privacy. His attorney, George Felos, said Tuesday he was pleased with the judge's decision. "We all have the right to privacy," Felos said. "It's guaranteed to us by the Constitution."

(excerpt) At a court hearing last week, Mrs. Schiavo's doctor, James Barnhill, testified that she could swallow saliva but not enough food to keep her alive. He also said some food would likely enter her lungs and could lead to infection, cough and pneumonia.

Mrs. Schiavo underwent three swallowing tests between 1990 and 1992. She has not had a test since then, but a speech pathologist later determined she could not be rehabilitated enough to swallow. The Schindlers' two doctors said recent observations indicate Mrs. Schiavo now may be able to swallow. Both doctors are part of a pro- life group that filed a motion asking that Mrs. Schiavo be kept alive.

"Without the test, she's going to be killed," said Dr. Jay Carpenter of Professionals for Excellence in Health Care.

Greer said he relied on "uncontroverted evidence" from Barnhill, who testified it is common for patients to be able to swallow but still need feeding tubes.

Tuesday night, a jury awarded Mrs. Schiavo and her husband, Michael, more than $2-million in a lawsuit they brought against the gynecologist who never asked about her medical or nutritional history while treating her.

During the trial, attorneys for the Schiavos showed a film of a day in Mrs. Schiavo's life at Sabal Palms Nursing Home in Largo. Although she's in a vegetative state, said St. Petersburg lawyer Glenn Woodworth, "you can tell she has some sense of her predicament."

"It's a tragic case," Woodworth said. "She was on the threshold of her life. They were ready to start a family . . . (On the film) she knows her husband and looks into his eyes."

As a child, Mrs. Schiavo was heavy. As a teenager, she weighed about 200 pounds. But she weighed only 120 pounds at age 25. She kept her weight off through a dangerous eating disorder, bulimia, which involves vomiting after eating.

The couple had been married about six years when Mrs. Schiavo began thinking she was pregnant because she kept missing her menstrual periods.

Her family doctor referred her to Dr. Stephen Igel, an obstetrician-gynecologist in Clearwater. But she wasn't pregnant, Woodworth said. She was missing her periods because of poor nutrition.

Woodworth and Miami lawyer Gary Fox maintained that Igel saw Mrs. Schiavo four times over a year and never asked about her nutrition and never noticed the loose skin and stretch marks resulting from her substantial weight loss.

"There were no questions about weight loss, eating habits or anything," Fox said. "She had significant stretch marks on her thighs. This was something a prudent gynecologist would not miss."

Igel treated only the symptoms, he said, not the cause.

On Feb. 24, 1990, after a year of treatment, Michael Schiavo heard a thud in the bathroom. When he went to see what happened, he found his wife crumpled on the floor. She had suffered a heart attack, Fox said.

"I think there are a lot of gynecologists out there who are treating women with Teri's symptoms in an ordinary way," Fox said. "But it's not an ordinary problem."

Igel's attorney, Kenneth Deacon, could not be reached for comment Wednesday.

Fox said Igel's attorney contended that Mrs. Schiavo should have disclosed her problem and that even if he had suspected and asked, she probably would have kept it from him because bulimics are often secretive.

The jury agreed partly with the defense. They originally awarded the Schiavos more than $6-million but found that she was 70 percent at fault. So they subtracted her liability from the award, bringing it down to $2-million, her attorneys said.

The verdict could have been higher, Woodworth said, if the jury hadn't found that because of the bulimia, Mrs. Schiavo had a life expectancy of only 17 more years.

Woodworth said he and Fox questioned the jury's decision to decrease the award and will discuss with Circuit Judge Phillip Federico whether it is legal.

The couple also sued Mrs. Schiavo's family doctor, Joel Prawer, but Prawer settled earlier this year for an undisclosed amount, Woodworth said.

Michael Schiavo has stayed with his wife and takes care of her, Fox said. He is in nursing school so that he can care for her on his own, Fox said.

"This is the kind of guy whose wedding vows are just that - vows," Fox said. "Ironically, Tuesday (the day of the verdict) was their eighth wedding anniversary."

To Fox, the case represents a larger problem: a dangerous societal pressure placed on women to be thin.

"I think it's important that women who have these eating disorders know the downside. I don't think they know how dangerous it is," he said.

Okay, I have been posting the links to articles I have found in St. Petersburg Times archives. Now, I did a bigger search and am finding a wealth of info about the earlier parts of this case. Here is the link to the archives. I did searches from 1992 on and found articles dealing with Terri being moved from the nursing facility to hospice as well as why the judge denied the order for the swallowing test...

Also don't miss the article on Felos done in 2001 where he states he might write another book...